Residential building in Khamovniki
The project of a residential building, which is proposed to be built in the 2nd Neopalimovsky lane, was presented to the architectural council by one of its authors, Alexander Tsimailo, by the bureau Tsimailo, Lyashenko and Partners. He said that currently there are two five-story buildings of the early 20th century on the site. They are supposed to be demolished due to the lack of architectural value. A new residential building will appear on the vacated territory - rectangular in plan, the most simple form. The house will be 4.5 m taller than the existing buildings, but will retain the building lines along the lane.
As for the architectural solution, here the authors adhered to the classics. Hence the characteristic articulations, the attic floor, horizontal cornices and the corresponding decor. It is planned to use light natural stone for decoration.
Anticipating the discussion, Evgenia Murinets reported that so far the issues of the transport scheme and the adjacent territory remain unfinished, but on the whole the project meets all the requirements of the GPZU. The Council accepted the project proposals with approval, however some disagreement arose regarding the ends. Alexey Vorontsov was confused by the decision to make the windows narrower at the end than on the main facade. In his opinion, because of this, the end visually looks wider. The authors explained that they deliberately made narrow window openings in order to perceive the building in perspective from the side of the alley.
A large number of windows - not only at the end, but along the entire perimeter of the volume - also puzzled Andrei Gnezdilov. In his opinion, it looks "somewhat intrusive", especially from the north side at the level of the first floors facing the neighboring site. “The building signals a public character, it bears little resemblance to a residential building,” Gnezdilov explained his position. "Besides, the author's charismatic approach gives a certain bend in this alley." Andrey Gnezdilov also noted the deviations from the classical proportions, especially in terms of the solution of the attic floor and the upper cornice.
Sergei Tchoban disagreed with his colleagues, who, on the contrary, thought that the verbose solution of the ends had turned them into "non-edge" facades. Choban recalled that Art Nouveau apartment buildings often had windows of different widths, so the proposed solution has a historical basis. As for the attic, here Sergei Tchoban suggested simply raising the horizontal cornice higher. A similar opinion was expressed by Vladimir Plotkin. The project seemed to him quite finished, and although he did not quite like the ends of the building, he noted the importance of the fact that the authors work so carefully with perspective and perspective.
The discussion was summed up by Sergey Kuznetsov, who proposed to approve the project. As for the controversial issues, given the divided opinions of the council members, he suggested leaving them to the discretion of the designers.
Library of INION RAS on Nakhimovsky Prospekt
The library was built in the mid-1970s by a team of authors under the leadership of Yakov Belopolsky and has become one of the examples of Soviet modernism. The upper floor, occupied by reading rooms and public spaces, was completely glazed. A long bridge led to the central entrance, spanning a wide pool, reflecting the horizontal composition of the object. In the roof, 264 hemispherical skylights were installed, defining the appearance of many interiors.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the building gradually fell into decay. Since 1994, the pool, necessary to maintain an optimal indoor climate, has been without water. After him, the footbridge was closed for passage. In the building itself, the air conditioning system was turned off. The process of destruction of building structures and cladding began. The fire of 2015 caused the collapse of the central part of the building and the complete destruction of its main facade. To save the books, even the structures that had survived had to be disassembled.
The project, developed by the Giprocon company, involves the complete restoration of the library while preserving its function and historical appearance. As the speaker said, the design documentation of Belopolsky, photographs of the existing library and its surviving fragments were taken as a basis. At the same time, it turned out to be impossible to use the surviving structures of the building: two independent examinations showed a deterioration in their condition. In this regard, the designers were recommended to plan their dismantling with the replacement of the main frame with a reinforced concrete one.
The new building exactly repeats the historical building spot, retains its height and horizontal composition. The interiors and the central hall with a wide staircase leading upstairs to reading rooms and media rooms are being restored. The finish will remain unchanged - glazing and cladding made of natural light stone. It was proposed to cover the courtyard facade with a stone, which was not done initially in order to save money.
However, this is not the only addition to the original project. The changes are explained by the need to adapt the Soviet building for modern use. So, to accommodate engineering equipment, approximately 20 percent of the skylights had to be closed. In their place, lamps of a similar shape will be installed in the interiors. For the organization of additional premises that do not require natural light, two underground floors have been designed in the courtyard. It will house book depositories, laboratories for digitizing books and technical rooms. In addition, in the central part, instead of two floors, it is proposed to make three - with the preservation of external proportions. As a result of these transformations, the building will receive an additional 14,000 m², which will make it possible to include the analytical information center of the Russian Academy of Sciences in the complex.
The fate of the pool remains unclear. In the presented project, due to the peculiarities of financing, its restoration is not provided. The designers propose either to make a public space in its place, or to restore only the bowl, covering its bottom with a lawn. The speaker explained that such a solution is temporary. The restoration of the pool will be allocated as a separate improvement project with its own funding program.
Highly appreciating the work done, the members of the architectural council agreed on the need to involve experts in the field of Soviet modernism in the work, since none of the existing architects can give an objective assessment of the submitted project. Sergei Kuznetsov drew the attention of the audience to the fact that the library today does not have a protection status. At the same time, its value is obvious and the idea of restoration, according to the chief architect, should be supported in every possible way.
Sergei Tchoban recalled that the project received a wide public response, so it is very important not to make a mistake here. “Although I had to deal with the restoration of a building in the mid-1960s in Germany, I am not an expert in the field of Soviet modernism,” commented Tchoban. “Therefore, I cannot take responsibility and agree with the proposed solution. Moreover, even without being a specialist, I see that instead of a monolithic it is proposed to make a hinged facade, instead of the original stained-glass windows, modern ones are used, and there are almost half the number of lamps on the roof. Without a competent expert assessment, it is impossible to understand whether such deviations are permissible,”Tchoban concluded.
All members of the council agreed with his opinion. Andrei Gnezdilov also called for an expert commission to be assembled, but suggested not delaying the restoration of the library, "until one of the enterprising customers built another residential complex on this site." Such a danger, according to Gnezdilov, exists, and the presence of modern residential buildings in the immediate vicinity of the ruins of the library is a direct confirmation of this. In addition, Andrei Gnezdilov explained that since we are not talking about restoration, the building can hardly be realized in exact accordance with the model of the mid-1970s - it simply will not pass any examination. “I think this proposal is a good outline for a restoration project. It is developing in the right direction, but it requires a very careful attitude,”commented Gnezdilov.
Vladimir Plotkin pointed out the importance of restoring not only the building, but also the pool, which, reflecting the building, was one of the components of the two-part development composition. A full-fledged recreation without a pool, according to Plotkin, cannot be. The authors of the project explained that they also advocate the return of the pool. But the main problem lies not even in the cost of its construction, but in the expensive operation: so far no one wants to bear these costs. Sergei Kuznetsov proposed to transfer the pool to the city's balance sheet and to consider it as an object of urban infrastructure.
Also, the designers said that the project was put under the control of the RAASN and that consultations had already been held with leading architects and experts. In conclusion, Sergey Kuznetsov noted the importance of the project and the very high level of its implementation. Nevertheless, he proposed to postpone the approval, but for his part promised to collect expert feedback as soon as possible, on the basis of which the final decision will be made.
